scholarly journals Comparison of Content on the American Board of Internal Medicine Maintenance of Certification Examination With Conditions Seen in Practice by General Internists

JAMA ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 317 (22) ◽  
pp. 2317 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bradley Gray ◽  
Jonathan Vandergrift ◽  
Rebecca S. Lipner ◽  
Marianne M. Green
Author(s):  
Robert D. Ficalora

Since 2006, more than 7,000 individuals per year have taken the ABIM initial certification examination, and between 3,000 and 5,000 individuals per year have taken the Maintenance of Certification (MOC) examination. This chapter has the following goals: review the content and format of the American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) examination, provide strategies for preparation for the examination, and give suggestions on how to utilize techniques to improve test-taking skills.


1970 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Debra Pugh MD, MHPE, FRCPC

A certification exam for the new sub-specialty of General Internal Medicine (GIM) was recently developed by an examination board at the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons (RCPSC). The board sought to create an exam that would reflect the challenges faced by practising general internists, while minimizing repetition of material already assessed by the Internal Medicine certification exam. In this paper, the authors present evidence for the validity of the content of the exam.


Based upon the popular review course from Harvard Medical School, this online resource is a comprehensive study guide for the American Board of Internal Medicine certification or maintenance of certification examination, as well as for general practice review by physicians and residents. Authoritative and thorough, it provides in-depth coverage across all specialties of internal medicine, including endocrinology, neurology, hepatology, rheumatology, gastroenterology, and more. It features numerous tables and figures, and detailed discussions with emphasis on essential learning points. It features over 350 board review questions, numerous tables and figures, detailed discussions with emphasis on essential learning points, and there is a further section dedicated to board simulation.


Author(s):  
Amit K. Ghosh

This chapter is aimed primarily at candidates preparing for the American Board of Internal Medicine's (ABIM's) certifying or maintenance of certification examination in internal medicine. However, candidates preparing for non-ABIM examinations also may benefit from the information, which covers various aspects of preparation for an examination, strategies to answer the questions effectively, and avoidance of pitfalls. The ABIM has stated that the certifying examination tests the breadth and depth of a candidate's knowledge in internal medicine to ensure that a candidate has attained the necessary proficiency required for the practice of internal medicine. According to the ABIM, the examination has 2 goals: the first is to ensure competence in the diagnosis and treatment of common disorders that have important consequences for patients, and the second is to ensure excellence in the broad domain of internal medicine.


2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (8) ◽  
pp. e641-e648
Author(s):  
Jonathan L. Vandergrift ◽  
Bradley M. Gray ◽  
Brendan J. Barnhart ◽  
Lorna A. Lynn ◽  
Rebecca S. Lipner

PURPOSE: Critics argue that the American Board of Internal Medicine’s medical oncology Maintenance of Certification examination requires medical oncologists with a narrow scope of practice to spend time studying material that is no longer relevant to their practice. However, no data are available describing the scope of practice for medical oncologists. METHODS: Using Medicare claims, we examined the scope of practice for 9,985 medical oncologists who saw 8.6 million oncology conditions in 2016, each of which was assigned to 1 of 23 different condition groups. Scope of practice was then measured as the percentage of oncology conditions within each of the 23 groups. We grouped physicians with similar scopes of practice by applying K-means clustering to the percentage of conditions seen. The scope of practice for each physician cluster was determined from the cancers that encompassed the majority of average oncology conditions seen among physicians composing the cluster. RESULTS: We found 20 distinct scope-of-practice clusters. The largest (n = 6,479 [65.5%]) had a general oncology scope of practice. The remaining physicians focused on a narrow scope of cancers, including 22.6% focused on ≥ 1 solid tumors and 11.9% focused on hematologic malignancies. The largest focused cluster accounted for 7.7% of physicians focused on breast cancer. CONCLUSION: A single American Board of Internal Medicine Maintenance of Certification assessment in medical oncology is most appropriate for approximately 65% of certified medical oncologists’ practices. However, the addition of assessments focused on breast cancer and hematologic malignancies could increase this figure to upwards of 85% of certified medical oncologists.


Author(s):  
Mitch Levine

The Choosing Wisely Canada program is intended to facilitate the more efficient use of health care resources. The program has messages for patients to align their expectations with an evidence based delivery of health care and to increase physician knowledge regarding evidence based directives for the appropriate use of investigations and treatments. In the current issue of CJGIM, an assessment was conducted regarding physician knowledge of the program, and the message was not positive. While many physicians acknowledged awareness of the Choosing Wisely Canada program, an appreciation of the specific messages on how to steer practice to evidence based activity was lacking amongst many. As these were the 33% who agreed to participate in the survey, one can only wonder whether a greater lack of knowledge about the program resides in the 67% that refused to participate. Despite having just laid a foundation of pessimism, I still wonder whether physicians are practicing evidence-based health care even if they do not know the detailed recommendations provided by the Choosing Wisely Canada program. The array of recommendations was developed by professional societies representing different clinical specialties in Canada. The Canadian Society of Internal Medicine (CSIM) established its Choosing Wisely Canada Top 5 recommendations by convening a Committee of 20 members that represented a diverse group of general internists from across Canada, reflecting a broad range of geographical regions, practice settings, institution types and experience.1 Below is the list of the five most recent recommendations targeted for physicians practicing in the field of internal medicine. Don’t routinely obtain neuro-imaging studies (computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, or carotid Doppler) in the evaluation of simple syncope in patients with a normal neurological examination.Don’t place, or leave in place, urinary catheters without an acceptable indication (such as critical illness, obstruction, palliative care).Don’t transfuse red blood cells for arbitrary hemoglobin or hematocrit thresholds in the absence of symptoms, active coronary disease, heart failure, or stroke.In the inpatient setting, don’t order repeated CBC and chemistry testing in the face of clinical and lab stability.Don’t routinely perform preoperative testing (such as chest X-rays, echocardiograms, or cardiac stress tests) for patients undergoing low risk surgeries.So, how are you doing in your practice? Mitchell LevineEditor, CJGIM


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document